Information sharing via electronic health records in team-based care: the patient perspective

What Do We Mean by Sharing of Patient Data? DaSH: A Data Sharing Hierarchy of Privacy and Ethical Challenges

BACKGROUND

 Clinical data sharing is common and necessary for patient care, research, public health, and innovation. However, the term "data sharing" is often ambiguous in its many facets and complexities-each of which involves ethical, legal, and social issues. To our knowledge, there is no extant hierarchy of data sharing that assesses these issues.

OBJECTIVE

 This study aimed to develop a hierarchy explicating the risks and ethical complexities of data sharing with a particular focus on patient data privacy.

METHODS

 We surveyed the available peer-reviewed and gray literature and with our combined extensive experience in bioethics and medical informatics, created this hierarchy.

RESULTS

 We present six ways on how data are shared and provide a tiered Data Sharing Hierarchy (DaSH) of risks, showing increasing threats to patients' privacy, clinicians, and organizations as one progresses up the hierarchy from data sharing for direct patient care, public health and safety, scientific research, commercial purposes, complex combinations of the preceding efforts, and among networked third parties. We offer recommendations to enhance the benefits of data sharing while mitigating risks and protecting patients' interests by improving consenting; developing better policies and procedures; clarifying, simplifying, and updating regulations to include all health-related data regardless of source; expanding the scope of bioethics for information technology; and increasing ongoing monitoring and research.

CONCLUSION

 Data sharing, while essential for patient care, is increasingly complex, opaque, and perhaps perilous for patients, clinicians, and health care institutions. Risks increase with advances in technology and with more encompassing patient data from wearables and artificial intelligence database mining. Data sharing places responsibilities on all parties: patients, clinicians, researchers, educators, risk managers, attorneys, informaticists, bioethicists, institutions, and policymakers.

Community views on the secondary use of general practice data: Findings from a mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

General practice data, particularly when combined with hospital and other health service data through data linkage, are increasingly being used for quality assurance, evaluation, health service planning and research. In this study, we explored community views on sharing general practice data for secondary purposes, including research, to establish what concerns and conditions need to be addressed in the process of developing a social licence to support such use.

METHODS

We used a mixed-methods approach with focus groups (November-December 2021), followed by a cross-sectional survey (March-April 2022).

RESULTS

The participants in this study strongly supported sharing general practice data with the clinicians responsible for their care, and where there were direct benefits for individual patients. Over 90% of survey participants (N = 2604) were willing to share their general practice information to directly support their health care, that is, for the primary purpose of collection. There was less support for sharing data for secondary purposes such as research and health service planning (36% and 45% respectively in broad agreement) or for linking general practice data to data in the education, social services and criminal justice systems (30%-36%). A substantial minority of participants were unsure or could not see how benefits would arise from sharing data for secondary purposes. Participants were concerned about the potential for privacy breaches, discrimination and data misuse and they wanted greater transparency and an opportunity to consent to data release.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that the public may be more concerned about sharing general practice data for secondary purposes than they are about sharing data collected in other settings. Sharing general practice data more broadly will require careful attention to patient and public concerns, including focusing on the factors that will sustain trust and legitimacy in general practice and GPs.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Members of the public were participants in the study. Data produced from their participation generated study findings.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Barriers and Opportunities for the Use of Digital Tools in Medicines Optimization Across the Interfaces of Care: Stakeholder Interviews in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

People with long-term conditions frequently transition between care settings that require information about a patient's medicines to be transferred or translated between systems. This process is currently error prone and associated with unintentional changes to medications and miscommunication, which can lead to serious patient consequences. One study estimated that approximately 250,000 serious medication errors occur in England when a patient transitions from hospital to home. Digital tools can equip health care professionals with the right information at the right time and place to support practice.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to answer the following questions: what systems are being used to transfer information across interfaces of care within a region of England? and what are the challenges and potential opportunities for more effective cross-sector working to support medicines optimization?

METHODS

A team of researchers at Newcastle University conducted a qualitative study by performing in-depth semistructured interviews with 23 key stakeholders in medicines optimization and IT between January and March 2022. The interviews lasted for approximately 1 hour. The interviews and field notes were transcribed and analyzed using the framework approach. The themes were discussed, refined, and applied systematically to the data set. Member checking was also performed.

RESULTS

This study revealed themes and subthemes pertaining to 3 key areas: transfer of care issues, challenges of digital tools, and future hopes and opportunities. We identified a major complexity in terms of the number of different medicine management systems used throughout the region. There were also important challenges owing to incomplete patient records. We also highlighted the barriers related to using multiple systems and their subsequent impact on user workflow, a lack of interoperability between systems, gaps in the availability of digital data, and poor IT and change management. Finally, participants described their hopes and opportunities for the future provision of medicines optimization services, and there was a clear need for a patient-centered consolidated integrated health record for use by all health and care professionals across different sectors, bridging those working in primary, secondary, and social care.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness and utility of shared records depend on the data within; therefore, health care and digital leaders must support and strongly encourage the adoption of established and approved digital information standards. Specific priorities regarding understanding of the vision for pharmacy services and supporting this with appropriate funding arrangements and strategic planning of the workforce were also described. In addition, the following were identified as key enablers to harness the benefits of digital tools to support future medicines optimization: development of minimal system requirements; enhanced IT system management to reduce unnecessary repetition; and importantly, meaningful and continued collaboration with clinical and IT stakeholders to optimize systems and share good practices across care sectors.

What influences a person's willingness to share health information for both direct care and uses beyond direct care? Findings from a focus group study in Ireland

Background: The sharing of health information is invaluable for direct care provision and reasons beyond direct care, such as for health services management. Previous studies have shown that willingness to share health information is influenced by an individual's trust in a healthcare professional or organisation, privacy and security concerns, and fear of discrimination based on sensitive information. The importance of engaging the public in policy and practice development relating to the use and sharing of health information has been identified as an essential step for countries to take. This study's aim was to examine the factors that influence the Irish public's willingness to share their health information as part of a national public engagement on health information. Methods: A qualitative study using online focus groups was conducted as part of a wider national public engagement on health information. Participants were purposively recruited from a combination of public, patient, and service user groups in Ireland. Focus group interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive content analysis. Results: In total, 85 participants took part in 14 focus groups between January and March 2021. Two major themes were identified, trust and personal and public benefits of sharing health information. The ability to exercise control over personal information, perceived transparency of the process, and the extent to which the healthcare service was viewed as confidential, all influenced the level of trust a person held. Perceived benefits were influenced by the extent to which participants believed information sharing would support improved care or provide broader public benefit, and balanced against the potential for personal harm. Conclusions: The findings allow for new insights into the views of the public on the use and sharing of personal health information and can be used to inform the development of a consent model for health information.

What influences a person’s willingness to share health information for both direct care and uses beyond direct care? Findings from a focus group study in Ireland

Background: The sharing of health information is invaluable for direct care provision and reasons beyond direct care, such as for health services management. Previous studies have shown that willingness to share health information is influenced by an individual’s trust in a healthcare professional or organisation, privacy and security concerns, and fear of discrimination based on sensitive information. The importance of engaging the public in policy and practice development relating to the use and sharing of health information has been identified as an essential step for countries to take. This study’s aim was to examine the factors that influence the Irish public’s willingness to share their health information as part of a national public engagement on health information. Methods: A qualitative study using online focus groups was conducted as part of a wider national public engagement on health information. Participants were purposively recruited from a combination of public, patient, and service user groups in Ireland. Focus group interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive content analysis. Results: In total, 85 participants took part in 14 focus groups between January and March 2021. Two major themes were identified, trust and personal and public benefits of sharing health information. The ability to exercise control over personal information, perceived transparency of the process, and the extent to which the healthcare service was viewed as confidential, all influenced the level of trust a person held. Perceived benefits were influenced by the extent to which participants believed information sharing would support improved care or provide broader public benefit, and balanced against the potential for personal harm. Conclusions: The findings allow for new insights into the views of the public on the use and sharing of personal health information and can be used to inform the development of a consent model for health information.